JCPA: The Fragility of the Liberal Democracies and the Challenge of Totalitarianism
The murder of George Floyd by a police officer in Minneapolis on May 25, 2020, triggered rioting, looting, and arson across the United States. It became evident that an underground leadership structure had been in place and set in motion a wave of violence whose destructiveness was unforeseen.Yair Rosenberg: Why Philo-Semitism is Better Than Anti-Semitism
According to Marxist-Leninist doctrine, the goal of organized mob violence is to foment a state of civil war, which will lead to revolution. The would-be revolutionaries in the United States did so well that their success exceeded their expectations.
Mayors of several major cities and governors of some states where violence took place chose not to act and ordered the police and firefighters to stand down. Such inaction created a state of anarchy, leaving the public without protection.
The moral shock resulting from the outbreak of mob violence which was not put down may have been worse than the actual damage caused by the rioters.
In the United States, it has been assumed that the creation of wealth is good for society, especially if through hard work, one could achieve the “American Dream.” Nonetheless, for the past decade, life has become complicated for many young adults. The growing numbers of this increasingly dissatisfied group in society must be taken into account.
The fragility of the liberal democracies is a serious dilemma. There is a short distance between “peaceful demonstrations” and mob violence, civil war, and regime change. The dynamics of political warfare and the methods of mob violence are knowable. Because it is a matter of self-defense, we must use this knowledge to safeguard our democracies and our freedoms.
Why people who like Jews, even for the wrong reasons, are usually better than those who don'tAdvice to Jewish celebs: Grow up!
Some time back, I wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post explaining my unified theory of Donald Trump’s relationship to the Jews. The purpose was to answer a simple yet confusing question: How can a man who has Jewish family, friends, and business associates, and who proudly proclaims his support for Israel, nonetheless regularly say anti-Semitic things?
In short, my explanation was that Trump accepts anti-Semitic stereotypes about Jews (they’re greedy, good with money, control lots of stuff, only look out for their own, etc.), but that he views these things as positive. “He is the human embodiment,” I wrote, “of the Onion article ‘Affable anti-Semite Thinks The Jews Are Doing Super Job With The Media.’”I situated this thinking in a broader context of historical “philo-Semitism”—people who believe traditionally anti-Semitic stereotypes about Jews, but take them as compliments and seek to befriend or emulate Jews as a result. In my piece, I explained how this sort of outlook can unfortunately be easily manipulated and used to turn people against Jews, and offered the example of South Korea, where philo-Semitic assumptions about Jews were used to galvanize the public against a Jewish businessman.
What I did not suggest in the article, however, is that philo-Semitism is the same thing as anti-Semitism. In fact, I was careful to say that it was better than the alternative. But nonetheless, thanks to the success and spread of the op-ed, I have seen commentators on both the right and left mistakenly suggest that its upshot is that philo-Semitism is simply another form of anti-Semitism, and that adherents of both should therefore be treated the same way. This is not what I believe and would actually be quite harmful in practice. I want to explain why.
1) It is a simplification to suggest that “philo-Semitism = anti-Semitism.” There are actually different types of philo-Semitism. There’s bad philo-Semitism that’s based on ignorance which typically regurgitates anti-Semitic stereotypes in a positive way, and then there’s good philo-Semitism based on actual knowledge of Jewish people and Judaism and the affinity that comes from that familiarity. Knowledge-based philo-Semitism is a wonderful thing and has produced true friends of the Jewish people! We should be striving to turn the former into the latter, whenever possible. (It is not always possible, as with ineducable individuals like the current president.)
I have a Jerry Seinfeld question. Why do Jewish celebrities keep whining about their parents?
Popular actor-comedian-director Seth Rogen ignited an Internet firestorm with his recent complaint that he was "fed [him] a huge amount of lies about Israel" when he grew up. His educators "never told him" that "Oh, by the way, there were people [Arabs] there." But Rogen says he now knows the truth and realizes that having a Jewish state "makes no sense."
What actually makes no sense is the notion that his educators said there were no Arabs in pre-Israel Palestine. Who in their right mind would think there were no Arabs? The 28 years of conflict leading up the creation of Israel in 1948 consisted of Palestinian Arab pogroms against the Jews there. I sincerely doubt the Rogens were so delusional as to not be aware of that.
Another Jewish pop-culture icon managed to reach from beyond the grave to peddle a similar complaint about his parents. Harvey Pekar, icon of the comic-book world, spent his final days on this earth creating a full-length graphic novel titled Not the Israel My Parents Promised Me. It was published a few years back, shortly after his passing.
His parents' apparent sin was being pro-Israel. I doubt that Mr. and Mrs. Pekar ever "promised" little Harvey that Israel was perfect. His book is a dreary regurgitation of standard anti-Israel nonsense that Pekar thinks he uncovered after shaking free of the shackles of his mother and father.
His initial "enlightenment" came via a "Jewish Trotskyist friend" who revealed that Israel is "racist." That was soon followed by some uncle at a Passover seder making remarks "against gentiles." Pekar turned that into a one-sentence summary of the Israeli-Arab conflict: "A lot of Israelis came from Eastern Europe, where they had been abused for centuries. They thought turnabout on gentiles was fair play."
The rest of the book drips with resentment at "Chauvinist Orthodox Jews" and demonic Jewish settlers. One is actually shown holding a saw and telling an equally villainous cohort, "Hold that board steady, Chaim Yankel!" I kid you not.











